MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3186734340

Bayesian iterative-cascade framework for hierarchical phrase-based translation.

2014· article· en· W3186734340 on OpenAlexaff
Baskaran Sankaran, Anoop Sarkar

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicNatural Language Processing Techniques
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer sciencePipeline (software)Translation (biology)Machine translationArtificial intelligencePhraseSynchronous context-free grammarCascadeNatural language processingMachine learningIterative methodScope (computer science)Bayesian probabilityTransfer-based machine translationExample-based machine translationAlgorithmProgramming languageEngineering
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The typical training of a hierarchical phrase-based machine translation involves a pipeline of multiple steps where mistakes in early steps of the pipeline are propagated without any scope for rectifying them. Additionally the alignments are trained independent of and without being informed of the end goal and hence are not optimized for translation. We introduce a novel Bayesian iterative-cascade framework for training Hiero-style model that learns the alignments together with the synchronous translation grammar in an iterative setting. Our framework addresses the above mentioned issues and provides an elegant and principled alternative to the existing training pipeline. Based on the validation experiments involving two language pairs, our proposed iterative-cascade framework shows consistent gains over the traditional training pipeline for hierarchical translation. 1

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.027

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.005

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.019
GPT teacher head0.297
Teacher spread0.278 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicNatural Language Processing Techniques→French-language works237,207→